Page 8 of 9
Posted: Tue Jul 18, 2006 7:00 am
by ChannelDelibird
BabyJesus wrote:ChannelDelibird wrote:I believe you BJ, but considering we've already wiped out two scum I would be happy to test your claim by lynching Max or CES. Considering I was already voting Max, I'll keep it that way.
what? why the fuck would you want to test my claim by voting Max? Considering I got a guilty on Strykker, sanity should not be an issue.
That post makes no sense whatsoever.
unvote, vote ChannelDelibird
Considering you
say
you got a guilty on Strykker. Just because it came from your mouth doesn't make it automatically true.
I've already said that I believe you but I would rather make absolutely sure.
Posted: Tue Jul 18, 2006 7:02 am
by BabyJesus
Primate wrote:
Plan: We play follow the cop.We have a Cop with a good scumdar and an unouted doc. We vote no-lynch until the cop finds us something and then the mafia is forced to kill off confirmed people to have any chance of winning. If the doc does finally die, we are at exactly the same point we were before, but with less people in the game, so more chance of hitting scum. Of course, the fact there are less people does mean that we get less wrong lynches without losing the game, but I think the possiblity of just stumbling onto a scum is too good to give up.
Bad things that fuck up plan: No Doc. Mafia Roleblocker. #2 is much more likely than 1, obviously.
Unvote Vote no lynch
I don't think no-lynch at this point is a good play. We've narrowed down the potential scum to 6 people out of the 9 people remaining. We don't have time for me to investigate all 6, we need to lynch one, I investigate one, and we'll be down to 4 unknowns tomorrow. Assuming the doc does not die at night, we can be down to 2 unknowns the following day. If the scum try to doc-hunt among the unknowns, that could narrow it down even further.
Posted: Tue Jul 18, 2006 7:06 am
by BabyJesus
ChannelDelibird wrote:BabyJesus wrote:ChannelDelibird wrote:I believe you BJ, but considering we've already wiped out two scum I would be happy to test your claim by lynching Max or CES. Considering I was already voting Max, I'll keep it that way.
what? why the fuck would you want to test my claim by voting Max? Considering I got a guilty on Strykker, sanity should not be an issue.
That post makes no sense whatsoever.
unvote, vote ChannelDelibird
Considering you
say
you got a guilty on Strykker. Just because it came from your mouth doesn't make it automatically true.
I've already said that I believe you but I would rather make absolutely sure.
Are you posting via laptop from the shortbus or something? Lynching a guy the cop claims is confirmed innocent is a horrible, horrible play. If I am scum - then Max is very likely innocent, and lynching him proves NOTHING.
No reason at this point not to finish off ChannelDelibird ....
Posted: Tue Jul 18, 2006 7:17 am
by ChannelDelibird
...ah, yes. I forgot to take into account that scum claiming cop would be naming innocents as innocents anyway.
unvote
So barring another cop, you're as confirmed as you're going to get (excluding death, that is. let's not get to that point). So, other than myself, was there anyone else you felt like lynching?
Posted: Tue Jul 18, 2006 7:24 am
by Max
well if we believe BJ and we say he's sane if you search 1 person a night we could soon lynch everyone
Posted: Tue Jul 18, 2006 9:08 am
by thedocsalive
Unvote: CES
BJ's claim makes sense.
But why isn't no lynch a viable option, assuming no mafia roleblocker? And even if there is a mafia blocker, we'll know after one night. Tonight, scum will have to kill an innocent, and BJ will investigate again. That would leave 8 alive, with three confirmed. No lynch, investigate, kill off innocent, leaves seven alive and three confirmed. Repeat process, until you have four alive and three confirmed. Better yet, BJ could just announce at the beginning of each day whether he has an innocent or guilty, and not reveal it if it's an innocent, which could result in scum killing unconfirmed players. The only flaws would be a mafia roleblocker (which, as I said, we'll know about after one night), or the doc dying.
Plus, if we decide to lynch each day, there's always the chance of us bandwagoning and outing the doc. I think no lynch is the safest approach here.
Vote: No lynch
Posted: Tue Jul 18, 2006 9:16 am
by ChannelDelibird
Posted: Tue Jul 18, 2006 10:10 am
by Cogito Ergo Sum
I think No lynch is a bad idea.
Our basic situation is probably that we have 3 :confirmed:s, 6 "unknowns" and 4 lynches left. Ergo, we just need BJ to investigate 2 more people and we're practically assured a win. In fact, if the doc is among the 6 unknowns, outing him today would still lead to victory. The scum would be forced to kill off an unknown and BJ would take care of another.
Conclusion: assuming we have a fairly standard setup(it is a mini regular after all), the only way for us to lose is through Max or me being a doctor and the doctor getting nked as long as we use all our four lynches. We're practically guaranteed a win.
Fyi, I'm not doubting BJ, because the GF kinda implies a cop.
Posted: Tue Jul 18, 2006 10:18 am
by Colonel Kurtz
I'm inclined to agree with BabyJesus on the ChannelDelibird lynch, because I have felt that he was acting waffly and only got on the Masterchief wagon because he knew he was toast that day. I don't like the way he voted a no lynch with no explanation only after another person had voted for it so it would look a little less like he was only voting it to save his own scummy hide.
vote ChannelDelibird
Posted: Tue Jul 18, 2006 10:28 am
by Primate
unvote no lynch vote ChannelDelibird
No lynch does have it's benefits, but C.E.S and Babyjesus' arguments in favour of lynching are just generally better. Let's get this done.
Posted: Tue Jul 18, 2006 3:11 pm
by warpdragon
I denfinately think that no lynch is bad, especially after CES's last post.
Vote CDb
. Thats 4 of 5.
Posted: Tue Jul 18, 2006 10:17 pm
by ChannelDelibird
I'm one from lynch, so I'll claim. I am a Mourner, who knew the fallen hero as a close friend. I have no powers.
No Lynch is the best idea as it avoids us outing the doc and it gets BJ more investigations.
Posted: Tue Jul 18, 2006 10:52 pm
by Cogito Ergo Sum
Did you read my post?
As long as we lynch every day, BJ just needs 2 investigations. And lynching you would also keep the doctor hidden.
Posted: Tue Jul 18, 2006 11:56 pm
by ChannelDelibird
Yeah, I got your point...I'd just rather not get lynched, ergo I prefer no lynch.
Posted: Wed Jul 19, 2006 12:17 am
by Primate
The truth is that it's just not worth taking the risk that you are lying. Personally, with a vanilla claim like that, I don't really think you're mafia, but you could be attempting some WIFOM that's gonna screw over for the rest of the game. It's just not in our benefit to pursue someone else and get them to claim as well as you today.
Posted: Wed Jul 19, 2006 12:56 am
by ChannelDelibird
Primate wrote:It's just not in our benefit to pursue someone else and get them to claim as well as you today.
I agree. This is why I am voting No Lynch.
Posted: Wed Jul 19, 2006 1:27 am
by Cogito Ergo Sum
No, my plan practically assures us a win. As such, if you are town, you should still want to be lynched actually.
Posted: Wed Jul 19, 2006 1:45 am
by ChannelDelibird
Bah. I suppose if I don't get lynched today BJ would have to investigate me tonight anyway to be sure, which means we do lose a night.
Any complaints if I hammer myself?
Posted: Wed Jul 19, 2006 1:46 am
by Primate
ChannelDelibird wrote:Bah. I suppose if I don't get lynched today BJ would have to investigate me tonight anyway to be sure, which means we do lose a night.
Any complaints if I hammer myself?
Nope. Go ahead.
Posted: Wed Jul 19, 2006 1:49 am
by ChannelDelibird
Primate wrote:ChannelDelibird wrote:Bah. I suppose if I don't get lynched today BJ would have to investigate me tonight anyway to be sure, which means we do lose a night.
Any complaints if I hammer myself?
Nope. Go ahead.
Why, thank you.
unvote, vote: ChannelDelibird
Hammer! Go town!
Posted: Wed Jul 19, 2006 2:24 am
by Primate
Posted: Wed Jul 19, 2006 2:43 am
by Colonel Kurtz
Channel - incidentally, you probably would have looked 75% less scummy had you not voted for no lynch the way you had. Just something I noticed.
Posted: Wed Jul 19, 2006 2:54 am
by ChannelDelibird
Colonel Kurtz wrote:Channel - incidentally, you probably would have looked 75% less scummy had you not voted for no lynch the way you had. Just something I noticed.
I'll remember that for future use.
Posted: Wed Jul 19, 2006 10:44 am
by mikeburnfire
Lynch Count:
ChannelDelibird (5): BabyJesus, Colonel Kurtz, Primate, warpdragon, ChannelDelibird
Cogito Ergo Sum (1): Jayden95
NoLynch (1): thedocsalive
Not voting (2): Max, Cogito Ergo Sum
You forcibly remove ChannelDelibird from the area. However, he was not a protester. His loud cries were cries of agony over the soldier's death.
ChannelDelibird, mourner (brother), has been removed. Night choices please.
Posted: Fri Jul 21, 2006 10:34 am
by mikeburnfire
You know that thing that happened to Tamuz last night? Same thing happened, but to Primate instead. Poor Primate. It's not easy losing your son, as evidenced by her emotional breakdown.
Primate, Mourner(mother), broke down N4. With seven people alive, four people are needed to give somebody the boot.